M 

fa*** 

#456 


Duke  University  Libraries 


D03212455M 


fuJ  SS< 


MAJORITY  REPORT 


COMMITTEE  m  ELECTIONS. 


The  committee  on  elections  to  whom    were  referred  the  petition  of 

.!.  P.  Johnson,  contesting  the  seat  of  Garland,  and  claiming  to 

have  been  elected  representative  from  the  Third  Congressional  His- 
trict  of  Arkansas,  and  certain  other  papers  relating  thereto,  have  had 
the  same  under  consideration  and 

REPORT. 

When  tiie  evidence  produced  in  support  of  the  contestants  claim 
■was  before  the  committee  at  the  last  session  of  Congress,  it  was  found 
to  be  so  conflicting  and  unsatisfactory  as  to  induce  them  to  recom- 
mend the  allowance  of  further  time  to  the  parties  to  prepare  their  res- 
pective allegations  and  proofs.  To  this  end,  and  with  a  view  of  eon- 
forming  proceedings  to  the  provisions  of  the  act  of  the  Congress  of 
the  United  States,  in  reference  to  contested  elections,  they  reported  to 
the  House  a  series  of  resolutions  as  follows  : 

1st.  Resolved,  That  thirty  days  be  allowed  to  contestant  to  amend 
his  notice  if  he  80  desire. 

2nd.  That  the  sitting  member  be  allowed  thirty  days  after  such 
amendment  is  made,  and  notice  thereof,  or  after  notice  of  contestants 
declining  to  amend,  in  which  to  make  and  serve  his  answer  thereto  on 
contestant,  setting  out  in  said  answer  the  grounds  on  which  he  rests 
the  validity  of  his  own.  and  denies  the  election  of  contestant. 

3rd.  That  after  service  of  the  answer  or  expiration  of  the  time 
limited  therefor,  sixty  days  be  allowed  the  parties  to  take  evidence, 
which  shall  be  confined  to  the  allegations  and  denials  contained  in  the 
notice  and  answer,  and  that  the  same  be  taken  and  transmitted  to  the 
House  under  the  rules  prescribed  by  the  act  of  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  approved  February  19,  1851,  entitled  "An  Ac 
prescribe  the  mode  of  obtaining  evidence  in  cases  of  contested  elec- 
tions." 

The  House  concurred  in  the  recommendation  and  adopted  the  reso- 
lutions, thus  prescribing  the  form  of  proceeding  to  be  pursuedin  con- 
ducting tic  contest. 


Soon  after  this  action  on  the  part  of  the  House,  on  the  oth  day  of 
April,  contestant  amended  his  notice  and  caused  a  copy  to  be  deliver- 
ed to  the  sitting  member.  The  latter  upon  his  return  to  Arkansas 
prepared  his  answer,  now  before  the  committee,  a  copy  of  which  he 
sent  to  the  sheriff  of  Desha  county,  the  residence  of  Mr.  Johnson, 
with  instructions  to  deliver  the  same  to  him.  This  was  not  done,  and 
for  his  failure  to  do  so  the  sheriff  returned  the  paper  with  the  follow- 
ing endorsements  ; 

"Came  to  hand.  April  27,  1862. 

S.  0.  Clayton,  Sheriff. 

"Not  executed  on  account  of  Jilson  P.  Johnson  being  absent  from 
my  count  v.  May  2?th.  1862. 

S.  C.  Clayton,  Sheriff. 

Further  and  additional  evidence  has  been  offered  before  the  com- 
mittee by  both  parties.  That  of  contestant  consists  in  transcripts 
from  the  poll-books  of  the  several  precincts  or  places  of  voting  in 
Arkansas  county,  deposited  in  the  county  court  clerk's  office  by  the 
judges  of  election,  verified  by  the  certificate  of  the  clerk  and  his  offi- 
cial seal.  These  transcripts  show  an  aggregate  vote  in  that  county  of 
one  hundred  and  thirty-three  (133)  for  contestant,  and  one  hundred 
and  ninety-five  (195)  for  the  sitting  member,  and  an  error  in  the  re- 
turns made  to  the  Governor,  the  correction  of  which  gives  to  con- 
testant a  plurality  of  eight  votes  in  the  district. 

The  sitting  member  has  taken  the  deposition  of  W.  E.  Morgan, 
Clerk  of  the  County  Court  of  Union  County,  for  the  purpose  of  show- 
ing a  loss  of  six  votes,  to  which  he  was  entitled  in  that  County.  The 
deposition  is  taken  without  notice  and  the  Committee  do  not  hesitate 
to  reject  it.  Its  admission  w:ould  not,  however,  change  the  result  as 
dependent  upon  other  evidence 

In  their  examination  of  the  case,  the  Committee  encounter  a  diffi- 
culty in  the  mode  of  authenticating  the  transcripts  and  the  absence 
of  proper  certificates  as  to  the  official  character  and  attestations  of 
the  Clerk.  They  do  not  profess  to  pursue  the  requirements  of  the 
Act  of  Congress  in  reference  to  contested  elections,  embodied  in  the 
resolution  of  the  House.  By  that  Act,  the  testimony  of  witnesses 
may  be  taken  upon  ten  days  notice,  before  any  Confederate  "  Judge, 
Chancellor,  Judge  or  Justice  of  a  Court  of  Record,  of  any  State,"  or 
"  Mayor,  Recorder  or  Intendantof  any  town  or  city,"  and  when  no  such 
officers  reside  in  the  Congressional  District,  before  "  any  two  Justices 
of  the  Peace"  residing  therein.  The  Magistrate  or  Justices  are  em- 
powered "to  require  the  production  of  papers,  and  on  the  refusal  or 
neglect  of  any  person  to  produce  and  deliver  up  any  paper  or  papers 
in  his  possession  pertaining  to  said  election,  or  to  produce  and  deliver 
up  certified  or  sworn  copies  of  the  same  in  case  they  may  be  official 
papers,"  he  shall  he  liable  to  certain  penalties,  and  it  is  then  declared 
that  : 

"All  papers  thus  produced,  and  all  certified  or  sworn  copies  of  official 
papers,  shall  he  transmitted  by  said  Magistrate  with  the  testimony  of 
witnesses  to  the  Clerk  of  the  House  of  Representatives." — B rightly* $ 
"Digest,  Elections,  Sec.  21. 


Pa^ 
#* 


Nor  do  the  transcripts  comply  with  the  requirements  of  the  Act  of 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States  of  March  27.  1804.  This  x\ct  pro- 
vides that : 

"  All  records  and  exemplifications  of  office  books,  which  are  or 
may  be  kept  in  any  public  office  of  any  State,  not  appertaining  to  a 
Court,  shall  be  praved  or  admitted  in  any  other  Court  or  office  in  any 
other  State,  by  the  attestation  of  the  keeper  of  the  said  records  or 
books,  and  the  seal  of  his  office  thereto  annexed,  if  there  be  a  seal. 
together  wit'>  a  certificate  of  the  presiding  Justice  of  the  Court  of  the 
County  or  District,  as  the  case  may  be.  in  -which  such  office  is  or  may 
be  kept,  or  of  the  Governor,  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  Chancellor  or 
the  keeper  of  the  great  seal  of  the  State,  that  the  said  attestation  is 
in  due  form  and  by  the  proper  officer  ;  and  the  said  certificate,  if  given 
by  the  presiding  Justice  of  a  Court, shall  be  further  authenticated  by 
the  Clerk  or  Prothonotary  of  the  said  Court,  who  shall  certify  under 
his  hand  and  the  seal  of  his  office,  that  the  said  presiding  Justice  is 
duly  commissioned  and  qualified ;  or  if  the  said  certificate  be  given 
by  the  Governor,  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  Chancellor  or  the  keeper 
of  the  great  seal,  it  shall  be  under  the  great  seal  of  the  State,  in 
which  the  said  certificate  is  made."" — Brightly  Digest,  Evidence,  Sec.  Id. 

The  transcripts  have  not  been  taken  and  transmitted  according  to 
the  resolution  of  the  House,  nor  do  they  come  clothed  with  the  forms 
of  authentication  prescribed  by  the  general  law. 

The  question  then  presents  itself:  can  the  Committee  or  the  House 
dispense  with  a  part  of  these  requirements,  and  if  so,  to  Avhat  extent, 
in  admitting  evidence  warranted  by  neither  statute  ?  The  question  is 
not  free  from  difficulty,  and  the  Committee  have  bestowed  upon  it 
their  careful  consideration. 

The  proceedings  before  them  are  essentially  judicial,  determining 
not  only  political,  but  personal  rights.  In  this  light  they  are  evidently 
regarded  by  the  Act  regulating  contested  elections,  and  the  former 
action  of  the  House.  As  such,  they  do  not  feel  authorized  to  dis- 
pense with  those  safeguards  which  the  law  has  thrown  around  evi- 
dence of  this  kind  for  the  security  of  personal  rights.  They  deem  it 
more  prudent  to  adhere  to  fundamental  principles  and  to  prescribed 
rules,  and  leave  for  the  guidance  of  others  a  precedent  finding  its 
sanctions  in  the  matured  wisdom  and  ripened  experience  in  which 
these  enactments  had  their  origin.  They  therefore  report  the  following 
resolution  : 

Resolved,  That  A.  H.  Garland,  is  entitled  to  the  seat  now  held  by 
him. 


Hollinger  Corp. 
pH8.5 


